Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the merchant be able to request your email and recipient phone number (#1)

@ianbjacobs,

>>Using a list of tokens means the API spec does not need to change in future for new types to be added.

> I don't think I agree. If you want to change what it means to conform (by adding a new feature) you need to revise the spec.

The list of tokens should not be defined in the API spec. This allows the API shape to stay the same and for browsers to begin supporting new data types in future.

I don't believe the specific list of data that the browser can gather for you should be part of the conformance criteria. Rather we should have an elegant way for developers to discover which data the user's browser can provide and which data they must collect themselves via the website.

So :+1: to this statement:

> If we take that approach, it will be (even more) important for user agents to declare programatically what features they support.

Further, if the only conformance requirement is accepting a list of identifiers then this can expand to include identifiers of a variety of types in future. My proposal uses schema.org type identifiers but it could be URLs or some other identifier in future. This also allows the user agent to hand this functionality off to another service like an identity provider in future (mentioned as being important by @AxelNennker and Joerg from DT).

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/issues/1#issuecomment-208963217